AITAH for refusing to change my baby’s name after my sister-in-law used it first?

Naming a baby is one of the most personal decisions a couple can make. When you’ve spent years choosing a name that resonates with your family’s vision, it’s only natural to feel protective if someone else swoops in and uses that name unexpectedly. That’s exactly what happened when our narrator discovered that his sister-in-law had given her son the exact same name—one that had been publicly announced as the long-planned name for his own baby.

Rather than giving in to the pressure of being “the bigger person” and changing the name, he and his wife decided to stand by their original choice. This decision, however, has sparked a family-wide debate, with some questioning whether a compromise should be made for the sake of harmony, and others asserting that names are common and should be seen as mere labels rather than exclusive property.

‘AITAH for refusing to change my baby’s name after my sister-in-law used it first?’

Experts in family psychology and cultural studies often highlight that names, despite their personal significance, are not exclusive property. Dr. Helen Ramirez, a sociocultural anthropologist, explains, “Many cultures embrace the re-use of names, whether in honor of ancestors or simply because certain names remain popular over generations. It’s not unusual for cousins or even siblings from extended families to share the same name.”

Furthermore, family counselors note that insisting on changing a baby’s name solely to avoid duplication is rarely necessary. “It’s important to remember that a name is a label—what really defines a person is who they become. Family identity is built on values, stories, and relationships, not just on a name,” says counselor Mark Ellison. In this light, the narrator’s decision to retain the chosen name aligns with both legal rights and cultural norms, as long as it does not cause confusion within the family context.

The argument that the sister-in-law “stole” the name is counterbalanced by the idea that names circulate freely in our societies. A name like Liam is widely popular and is unlikely to cause significant confusion. Experts advise that open communication is key. “If family members are concerned, a conversation about how names can be shared with pride—rather than seen as a takeover—might help bridge the emotional gap,” suggests Ellison. The focus should be on the meaning behind the name rather than its exclusivity.

These are the responses from Reddit users:

The Reddit community largely sympathizes with the narrator’s stance. Comments point out that names are not owned by any one family member and that it is common for multiple people—even within the same extended family—to have the same name without issue. Some contributors remarked that if someone really dislikes the repetition, they can always adopt a unique middle name as a personal distinguishing marker.

Others noted that the emotional sting comes from high expectations and public announcements, rather than the actual act of sharing a popular name. Overall, the majority of users voted NTA, applauding the couple for standing by their choice despite external pressures.

In conclusion, this situation highlights the tension between personal decisions and family dynamics. While some might argue that changing the name could have maintained smoother relations, the decision to stick with a name chosen long before—and made public in advance—is both understandable and defensible. Names are cultural artifacts shared across generations, and the repetition of a name does not diminish its personal significance.

What are your thoughts on naming in families? Have you experienced a similar situation where a name was “claimed” by more than one person in the family? Share your experiences and opinions—let’s discuss whether certain names should be considered exclusive or simply a shared celebration of identity.